-
1.
[Not Available].
Privalova, EV, Lishuta, AS
Kardiologiia. 2018;(11):63-71
Abstract
Most patients with arterial hypertension (AH) for successful long-term blood pressure (BP) control require combination of antihypertensive drugs acting on various target organs. Accumulated experience shows that about 30 % of patients require combination therapy with 3 drugs from different pharmacological classes. Efficacy of BP control in real clinical practice with the use of various doses of perindopril, indapamide, and amlodipine as components of taken once-daily triple fixed combination was assessed in the 3-months prospective observational open-label PETRA study. In this study data of office BP measurements and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) were obtained from 11209 ambulatory patients (47.6 % women) with AH. Initial mean office BP (BPmoff) was 156.58±16.10 / 91.56±9.33 mm Hg, AH duration - 9.48±7.19 years. After switching to triple fixed dose combination of perindopril, indapamide, and amlodipine BPmoff decreased by 24.81±15.47 / 11.41±9.90 mm Hg (p<0.0001). Doses of perindopril, indapamide, and amlodipine in combination at the final visit were 5 / 1.25 / 5, 10 / 2.5 / 5, and 10 / 2.5 / 10 mg. 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) was carried out in 76 patients. Mean 24-hour BP lowed from mean 155.51±17.43 / 85.28±11.48 down to 134.63±12.51 / 77.83±8.99 mm Hg (p<0.0001). Clinically relevant improvement of a number of parameters of metabolism occurred after 3 months of the study (in particular, lowering of levels of total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [-8.6 and - 11.4 %, respectively], triglycerides [-12,1 %], fasting blood glucose [-6.6 %]). Thus, results of the PETRA study confirmed 24-hour long antihypertensive efficacy of triple fixed dose combination of perindopril, indapamide, and amlodipine. This drug combination can present novel possibility in treatment of patients with AH who have not achieved target BP values on preceding dual combination therapy and fully corresponds with the single pill concept for formation of adherence to therapy.
-
2.
Comparison of amlodipine versus other calcium channel blockers on blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients in China: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.
Zhang, L, Yang, J, Li, L, Liu, D, Xie, X, Dong, P, Lin, Y
Journal of comparative effectiveness research. 2018;(7):651-660
Abstract
AIM: Reducing the fluctuation of blood pressure has recently been recognized as a potential target for improving management of hypertension to prevent cardiovascular events, particularly for strokes. Some randomized controlled trials demonstrated that amlodipine can effectively reduce blood pressure as a well-established, long-acting calcium channel blocker (CCB). However, few data are available for amlodipine on blood pressure variability (BPV) in China in a real-world setting. This study aimed to assess the effect of amlodipine versus other CCB antihypertensive agents on BPV. MATERIALS & METHODS A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis was conducted, which retrieved the encounter data from 5582 hypertensive inpatients (with a median age of 69, female percentage of 48%, diastolic blood pressure ≥40 and <150 mmHg; systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥70 mmHg and <260 mmHg), who had taken at least one antihypertensive agent and completed at least three SBP measurements during the visit. International Classification of Diseases was used to identify the hypertensive patients. BPV was calculated with standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CV) of SBP during a single inpatient visit. The Propensity Score Matching was used to balance the cohort of patients prescribed amlodipine or other CCBs. A series of appropriate statistical tests were applied to the propensity score-matched samples to examine the different effects on BPV. Additionally, the hypertensive patients with comorbidity such as coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, heart failure and chronic kidney disease were analyzed. RESULTS For the hypertensive patients (n = 1756, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine showed lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs (12.90 vs 13.76 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.47 vs 10.06, p < 0.05 [CV]). For the hypertensive patients with comorbidity (n = 1080, for each cohort), patients prescribed amlodipine had lower BPV than patients prescribed other CCBs as well (13.24 vs 14.23 mmHg, p < 0.05 [SD] and 9.66 vs 10.28, p < 0.05 [CV]). CONCLUSION amlodipine was associated with lower BPV than other CCBs for both hypertensive patients and hypertensive patients with comorbidity.
-
3.
Amlodipine in the Era of New Generation Calcium Channel Blockers.
Tiwaskar, M, Langote, A, Kashyap, R, Toppo, A
The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India. 2018;(3):64-9
Abstract
Amlodipine is a classical drug with varied properties extending from control of blood pressure to as an antianginal and anti atherosclerotic agent. Amlodipine is a longer acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker, effective for 24 hours BP control and cause no BP variability. It is a powerful, well-tolerated, and safe antihypertensive agents that is widely used either alone or as a key component of combination therapy for hypertension. Its effective BP reduction has shown proven benefits in cardiovascular event reduction that is supported with strong evidences from large randomised controlled trials. Combination therapies of amlodipine with other agents eliciting renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade (angiotensin II receptor blockers or renin inhibitors) have shown effective blood pressure-lowering strategies in CV risk reduction and progression of renal disease. Novel type of calcium channel blockers have been developed which have additional properties of blocking T and N subtypes of calcium channels and apart from their class effects they exerts specific action on heart rate and renin aldosterone system. They are considered to be more renoprotective due to this additional properties. Amlodipine is most potent and longer acting agent compared to the newer CCBs, its effectiveness in BP lowering still makes it the agent of choice among all the CCBs.
-
4.
Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Exercise-Induced Lipid Metabolism in Patients With Obesity and Hypertension.
Engeli, S, Stinkens, R, Heise, T, May, M, Goossens, GH, Blaak, EE, Havekes, B, Jax, T, Albrecht, D, Pal, P, et al
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979). 2018;(1):70-77
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
UNLABELLED Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696), a novel angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, was recently approved for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Neprilysin degrades several peptides that modulate lipid metabolism, including natriuretic peptides. In this study, we investigated the effects of 8 weeks' treatment with sacubitril/valsartan on whole-body and adipose tissue lipolysis and lipid oxidation during defined physical exercise compared with the metabolically neutral comparator amlodipine. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group study enrolling subjects with abdominal obesity and moderate hypertension (mean sitting systolic blood pressure ≥130-180 mm Hg). Lipolysis during rest and exercise was assessed by microdialysis and [1,1,2,3,3-2H]-glycerol tracer kinetics. Energy expenditure and substrate oxidation were measured simultaneously using indirect calorimetry. Plasma nonesterified fatty acids, glycerol, insulin, glucose, adrenaline and noradrenaline concentrations, blood pressure, and heart rate were also determined. Exercise elevated plasma glycerol, free fatty acids, and interstitial glycerol concentrations and increased the rate of glycerol appearance. However, exercise-induced stimulation of lipolysis was not augmented on sacubitril/valsartan treatment compared with amlodipine treatment. Furthermore, sacubitril/valsartan did not alter energy expenditure and substrate oxidation during exercise compared with amlodipine treatment. In conclusion, sacubitril/valsartan treatment for 8 weeks did not elicit clinically relevant changes in exercise-induced lipolysis or substrate oxidation in obese patients with hypertension, implying that its beneficial cardiovascular effects cannot be explained by changes in lipid metabolism during exercise. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01631864.
-
5.
Calcium channel blockers for preventing cardiomyopathy due to iron overload in people with transfusion-dependent beta thalassaemia.
Sadaf, A, Hasan, B, Das, JK, Colan, S, Alvi, N
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(7):CD011626
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Beta thalassaemia is a common inherited blood disorder. The need for frequent blood transfusions in this condition poses a difficult problem to healthcare systems. The most common cause of morbidity and mortality is cardiac dysfunction from iron overload. The use of iron chelation therapy has reduced the severity of systemic iron overload but specific, non-toxic treatment is required for removal of iron from the myocardium. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of calcium channel blockers combined with standard iron chelation therapy in people with transfusion-dependent beta thalassaemia on the amount of iron deposited in the myocardium, on parameters of heart function, and on the incidence of severe heart failure or arrhythmias and related morbidity and mortality. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched ongoing trials databases, and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Date of last search: 24 February 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials of calcium channel blockers combined with standard chelation therapy compared with standard chelation therapy alone or combined with placebo in people with transfusion-dependent beta thalassaemia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria for the selection of trials. Two authors assessed the risk of bias of trials and extracted data and a third author verified these assessments. The authors used the GRADE system to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS Two randomised controlled trials (n = 74) were included in the review; there were 35 participants in the amlodipine arms and 39 in the control arms. The mean age of participants was 24.4 years with a standard deviation of 8.5 years. There was comparable participation from both genders. Overall, the risk of bias in included trials was low. The quality of the evidence ranged across outcomes from low to high, but the evidence for most outcomes was judged to be low quality.Cardiac iron assessment, as measured by heart T2*, did not significantly improve in the amlodipine groups compared to the control groups at six or 12 months (low-quality evidence). However, myocardial iron concentration decreased significantly in the amlodipine groups compared to the control groups at both six months, mean difference -0.23 mg/g (95% confidence interval -0.07 to -0.39), and 12 months, mean difference -0.25 mg/g (95% confidence interval -0.44 to -0.05) (low-quality evidence). There were no significant differences between treatment and control groups in serum ferritin (low-quality evidence), liver T2* (low-quality evidence), liver iron content (low-quality evidence) and left ventricular ejection fraction (low-quality evidence). There were no serious adverse events reported in either trial; however, one trial (n = 59) reported mild adverse events, with no statistically significant difference between groups (low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The available evidence does not clearly suggest that the use of calcium channel blockers is associated with a reduction in myocardial iron in people with transfusion-dependent beta thalassaemia, although a potential for this was seen. There is a need for more long-term, multicentre trials to assess the efficacy and safety of calcium channel blockers for myocardial iron overload, especially in younger children. Future trials should be designed to compare commonly used iron chelation drugs with the addition of calcium channel blockers to investigate the potential interplay of these treatments. In addition, the role of baseline myocardial iron content in affecting the response to calcium channel blockers should be investigated. An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the treatment is also required.
-
6.
Association of 3 Different Antihypertensive Medications With Hip and Pelvic Fracture Risk in Older Adults: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Puttnam, R, Davis, BR, Pressel, SL, Whelton, PK, Cushman, WC, Louis, GT, Margolis, KL, Oparil, S, Williamson, J, Ghosh, A, et al
JAMA internal medicine. 2017;(1):67-76
Abstract
IMPORTANCE On the basis of observational studies, the use of thiazide diuretics for the treatment of hypertension is associated with reduced fracture risk compared with nonuse. Data from randomized clinical trials are lacking. OBJECTIVE To examine whether the use of thiazide diuretics for the treatment of hypertension is associated with reduced fracture risk compared with nonuse. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Using Veterans Affairs and Medicare claims data, this study examined hip and pelvic fracture hospitalizations in Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial participants randomized to first-step therapy with a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone), a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate), or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril). Recruitment was from February 1994 to January 1998; in-trial follow-up ended in March 2002. The mean follow-up was 4.9 years. Posttrial follow-up was conducted through the end of 2006, using passive surveillance via national databases. For this secondary analysis, which used an intention-to-treat approach, data were analyzed from February 1, 1994, through December 31, 2006. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Hip and pelvic fracture hospitalizations. RESULTS A total of 22 180 participants (mean [SD] age, 70.4 [6.7] years; 43.0% female; and 49.9% white non-Hispanic, 31.2% African American, and 19.1% other ethnic groups) were followed for up to 8 years (mean [SD], 4.9 [1.5] years) during masked therapy. After trial completion, 16 622 participants for whom claims data were available were followed for up to 5 additional years (mean [SD] total follow-up, 7.8 [3.1] years). During the trial, 338 fractures occurred. Participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs amlodipine or lisinopril had a lower risk of fracture on adjusted analyses (hazards ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98; P = .04). Risk of fracture was significantly lower in participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs lisinopril (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98; P = .04) but not significantly different compared with those randomized to receive amlodipine (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63-1.08; P = .17). During the entire trial and posttrial period of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of fractures was nonsignificantly lower in participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs lisinopril or amlodipine (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74-1.03; P = .10) and vs each medication separately. In sensitivity analyses, when 1 year after randomization was used as the baseline (to allow for the effects of medications on bone to take effect), similar results were obtained for in-trial and in-trial plus posttrial follow-up. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings from a large randomized clinical trial provide evidence of a beneficial effect of thiazide-type diuretic therapy in reducing hip and pelvic fracture risk compared with treatment with other antihypertensive medications. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000542.
-
7.
[A fixed-dose lisinopril+amlodipine+rosuvastatin combination: prospects for its use in patients with hypertension and concomitant dyslipidemia].
Podzolkov, VI, Bragina, AE, Osadchiy, KK
Terapevticheskii arkhiv. 2017;(12):133-140
Abstract
In Russia, target blood pressure (BP) levels are achieved in only 14.4% of men and in 30.9% of women. The need for combination therapy of hypertension is as high as 70.7%. There are well-known benefits of combined antihypertensive therapy allowing for higher efficiency and better tolerability. One of the current combinations is a combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and a calcium antagonist, which have pronounced protective activity and metabolic neutrality. Fixed-dose combinations have substantial advantages over free ones, contributing to improving patient compliance with the used treatment regimen. Dyslipidemia is present in 60.7% of the hypertensive patients. Nonetheless, only 9.7% of Russian patients with coronary heart disease take statins and control of lipid levels remains very poor. The review discusses whether the use of the triple combination lisinopril + amlodipine + rosuvastatin is reasonable from the standpoint of evidence-based medicine. There are literature data suggesting the high value of this fixed-dose combination in the context of organ protection and the reduced risk of cardiovascular events.
-
8.
A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and the Tolerability of a Triple Combination of Amlodipine/Losartan/Rosuvastatin in Patients With Comorbid Essential Hypertension and Hyperlipidemia.
Lee, HY, Kim, SY, Choi, KJ, Yoo, BS, Cha, DH, Jung, HO, Ryu, DR, Choi, JH, Lee, KJ, Park, TH, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2017;(12):2366-2379
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a triple combination of amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. METHODS A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted. Eligible patients with hypertension and a sitting diastolic blood pressure (SiDBP) of >90 mm Hg and LDL-C levels <250mg/dL were screened. After a 4-week run-in period with therapeutic lifestyle changes and losartan potassium 100mg once daily, patients who met both blood pressure criteria (80 mm Hg ≤ SiDBP < 110 mm Hg) and the LDL-C level criteria (defined in the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III cardiovascular risk categories) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups and treated once daily for 8 weeks: losartan potassium 100mg + rosuvastatin 20mg treatment (L/R 100/20) group, amlodipine camsylate 5mg + losartan potassium 100mg treatment (A/L 5/100) group, and amlodipine 5mg+ losartan potassium 100mg + rosuvastatin 20mg (A/L/R 5/100/20) group. The primary efficacy variables were the percent change in LDL-C in the A/L/R 5/100/20 and A/L 5/100 groups and the mean change of SiDBP in the A/L/R 5/100/20 and L/R 100/20 groups after 8 weeks of treatment, relative to baseline values. FINDINGS A total of 146 patients were enrolled and the demographic characteristics were similar among the 3 treatment groups. After 8 weeks of treatment, the mean (SD) percent change in LDL-C was significantly greater in the A/L/R group than in the A/L group (-48.40% [2.77%] vs -6.70% [3.00%]; P < 0.0001). Moreover, the mean change in SiDBP was significantly greater in the A/L/R group than in the L/R group (-9.75 [0.92] mm Hg vs -1.73 [1.03] mm Hg; P < 0.0001). SiDBP and LDL-C reductions in the A/L/R group were comparable to reductions in the A/L and L/R groups, respectively. Ten adverse events were reported in 7 patients (4.83%), and 1 patient from the A/L group (0.69%) experienced 2 adverse drug reactions (tachycardia and face edema), which were mild and resolved without specific treatment. There were no clinically significant tolerability issues during the treatment period. IMPLICATIONS Triple combination therapy with amlodipine/losartan/rosuvastatin can be an effective therapeutic strategy in patients with hypertension combined with dyslipidemia. These findings will form the foundation of the future development of a single-pill triple combination. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02899455.
-
9.
A randomized, controlled study evaluating effects of amlodipine addition to chelators to reduce iron loading in patients with thalassemia major.
Eghbali, A, Kazemi, H, Taherahmadi, H, Ghandi, Y, Rafiei, M, Bagheri, B
European journal of haematology. 2017;(6):577-581
Abstract
AIM: Cardiomyopathy due to iron overload can be fatal in patients with thalassemia major. Calcium channel blockers seem to be effective to reduce iron loading. Our goal was to study effects of amlodipine addition to chelators on iron loading in patients with thalassemia major. METHODS This randomized, controlled, and single-center trial was performed on 56 patients with thalassemia major. Patients were randomized 1:1 to combined group (iron chelator plus amlodipine) or control group (iron chelator) for 1 year. Iron content was measured by magnetic resonance imaging; heart T2*, and liver T2*. Serum ferritin was also measured. RESULTS After 12 months of treatment, myocardial T2* values had significant improvement in combined group (21.9 ± 8.0 ms to 24.5 ± 7.6 ms; P < .05); Difference between two groups was significant (P = .02). Combined treatment had no effect on hepatic T2* value (9.6 ± 2.8 ms to 9.5 ± 3.6 ms); difference between two groups was not significant (P = .2). In addition, a significant reduction was seen in serum ferritin levels in two groups. Mild gastrointestinal upset was the most common untoward effect. CONCLUSION Addition of amlodipine to iron chelators has beneficial effects for reduction of iron loading in patients with thalassemia major. This combination therapy seems safe.
-
10.
Reduction in microalbuminuria by calcium channel blockers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension-A randomized, open-label, active-controlled, superiority, parallel-group clinical trial.
Hwang, YC, Yoon, KH, Cha, BS, Lee, KW, Jang, HC, Min, KW, Chung, CH, Lee, MK
International journal of clinical practice. 2017;(9)
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND It has been suggested that renoprotection with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) may differ. This study aimed to compare the anti-proteinuric effect of different CCBs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS A multicentre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study was performed in seven centres in Korea. A total of 74 patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers were randomized to a cilnidipine 10 mg treatment (n=38) or amlodipine 5 mg treatment (n=36). RESULTS Urine albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR) reduction was similar between the two groups at 12 weeks (-53.0±123.2 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -35.7±83.6 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.29) or 24 weeks (-57.3±106.9 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -20.0±110.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.24). In a subgroup analysis, cilnidipine treatment showed a larger ACR reduction than amlodipine treatment at 12 weeks (-84.7±106.8 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -9.5±79.2 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.01) and 24 weeks (-84.0±111.7 mg/g in cilnidipine group and 14.6±119.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.008), particularly in patients with a longer duration of diabetes more than 10 years. CONCLUSIONS Cilnidipine did not show any additional anti-albuminuric effect compared with amlodipine in patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with an RAS blocker. However, the anti-albuminuric effect of cilnidipine might differ according to the duration of diabetes.